George Soro-funded Human Rights Watch’s allegation that the Ugandan AIDS program is “falling under the influence of US Christian conservatives” is a deceit designed to push a PC “free sex and rubbers” approach to AIDS/HIV treatment.
I’m not sure that I understand what you understand. The Ugandan program has always been ABC – abstinence, be faithful, use condoms. Its always been a three legged stool, not one above the other. But, I could be wrong…
from http://www.avert.org/aidsuganda.htm:
Why was Uganda’s response so effective?
The approach used in Uganda has been named the ABC approach – firstly, encouraging sexual Abstinence until marriage; secondly, advising those who are sexually active to Be faithful to a single partner or to reduce their number of partners; and finally, especially if you have more than one sexual partner, always use a Condom. A number of factors helped to encourage people to take up these strategies.
Communication
It seems that the message about HIV and AIDS has been effectively communicated to a diverse population by the government and by word of mouth. Ugandan people have themselves to thank, in part, for the reduction in the HIV prevalence rate. Much of the prevention work that has been done in Uganda has occurred at grass-roots level, with a multitude of tiny organisations educating their peers, mainly made up of people who are themselves HIV+. There was considerable effort made towards breaking down the stigma associated with AIDS, and frank and honest discussion of sexual subjects that had previously been taboo was encouraged. There is a high level of AIDS-awareness amongst people generally.
Community action
Very early in the course of the epidemic, the government recruited the Ugandan people to help themselves in the fight against HIV/AIDS. One of the first community-based organisations to be formed was TASO, the AIDS Support Organization founded in 1987, a time when there was still a great deal of stigmatisation of people with HIV.
“The founders met informally in each other’s homes or offices to provide mutual psychological and social support. Cohesion among these individuals was strengthened by the fact that they were either directly infected with HIV or implicitly affected because their very close familial associates were infected”.
TASO now provides emotional and medical support to people who are HIV positive and their families. It also works with other smaller organisations to educate the public about discrimination and about the dangers of HIV/AIDS.
Fear
A Cambridge University study in 1995 showed that 91.5% of Ugandan men and 86.4% of women knew someone who was HIV positive, and that word of mouth was the method by which most people were informed about HIV prevention. This indicates that one of the main reasons for people’s behaviour change was their alarm about the risks and the extent of the epidemic. Many villages are experiencing several deaths each month, houses stand empty, and grandparents are looking after their orphaned grandchildren. Put simply, people are more likely to avoid risky behaviour if they know people who have died of AIDS-related illnesses.
Simple messages
In the early stages of the epidemic, the government responded swiftly, giving out simple messages about abstaining from sex until marriage, staying faithful to one’s spouse, and using condoms. The key message was “Zero Grazing”, which instructed people to avoid casual sex. More complicated messages about risky behaviour and safer sex were not spread until later, when there had already begun to be a decline in HIV figures.
Political openness
Since 1986, when Uganda’s health Minister announced that there was HIV in the country, there has always been political openness and honesty about the epidemic, the risks, and how they might best be avoided. In that same year, the President toured the country, telling people that it was their patriotic duty to avoid contact with HIV. This was a brave approach, as many politicians are reluctant to talk openly about sexual issues, but the openness paid off.
The president encouraged input from numerous government ministries, NGOs and faith-based organisations. He relaxed controls on the media and a diversity of prevention messages – including ‘zero-grazing’ – spread through Uganda’s churches, schools and villages. This frank and honest discussion of the causes of HIV infection seems to have been a very important factor behind the changes in people’s behaviour that allowed prevalence levels to decline.
This contrasts sharply with countries like South Africa, which have lacked this political leadership in the fight against the epidemic. Uganda’s entire population was mobilised in the fight against HIV and were made aware of the consequences that risky behaviour could have for their country. It is largely due to the Ugandan people, motivated by their leaders, that the epidemic appears to have been so well addressed.
The post is particularly interesting because it underscores the deep roots of Uganda’s formula for success — success the Global Fund is jeopardizing by suspending the country’s $201 million in AIDS, tuberculosis and malaria grants.
